6th Gen EV/IV & Nature system revamp?

I put it like this...Any change to the IV/EV system and the competitive people are going to be really pissed off...

If there is any change to the system...Too bad for them,I don't care about IV/EV anyways...


I don't battle competitively and it shows,but I again...don't care...I battle the way I want to anyways.

First - I'd love to be able to see IVs and EVs in-game. That'd make life a whole lot easier.

I've toyed with the notion of leaving the natures as they are, but decreasing the effect - maybe instead of +/- 10%, make them all +/- 5% or something like that. As it stands, I think nature has a bit too much of an impact. I'm not sure, but I don't think that'd have any lasting effect on the competitive metagame, since everything would change - sweepers would have 5% less attack, but walls would have 5% less defense, so it'd even out. And it would make it less punishing to use different natures in-game, which would make it more feasible to use natures that just seem appropriate aesthetically, instead of just Adamant or Jolly physical sweepers and Modest or Timid special sweepers and so on. It'd also make mixed stats and split EVs more viable.

IVs are fine as they are, IMO.

EVs are a bit strange - it doesn't really make sense to gain a greater ability for something solely because of the opponent's ability at it - but I don't know if they could be done better. They could be tied to what the pokemon does - using special attacks gains special attack EVs for instance - and that would make more sense in a way, but that runs into a whole bunch of problems that I won't go into here, so I guess the current system is about the best, odd though it is.

I'd love to see happiness have more of an effect, in part because that'd reward people who are loyal to their pokemon (which has been a fundamental part of the underlying message of the games all along, though only expressed in a handful of evolutions and the base power of Return), and in part, honestly, because there are some players who already rage at the apparently intolerable burden of happiness evolutions, and it'd amuse me to see them rage that much more because they have to actually spend time with a pokemon before it reaches its peak of power.

That last - having happiness have an effect on stats - is one I wouldn't be surprised to see, especially, as noted, with the hint they already dropped. It'll be interesting if they do.

I posted this in a thread before it was locked, but it seems appropriate here:



"Why does the RNG get to decide my Pokémon's ultimate potential? and Don't give me that "it's like a pokemon's DNA!" crap. The player should have full control of a pokemons battle statistics through training.

If they want a DNA system, then damn it, make a proper DNA system! The game has gone 3d, now would be a great time to have pokemon that have different height values, or larger/smaller body types, differing hair/fur styles, ETC. Come on Gamefreak it's 2013, get creative"




I have been saying this for a long time now, the IV system is bad. It has always been bad, in a a turn based game where your pokemon's statistics are so important they should never be handed over to the computer and randomized. Especially, IN THE BACKGROUND!

The worst part about them? IVs can roll ZERO! What the hell? out of 31 they can roll 0... Who at Gamefreak thought that was a good idea? Now your Gardevoir is totally ruined because her Sp. Atk IV has rolled a zero....

Anyway, the point is, something as important as stat allocation should be left up to the effort of the player, not predetermined before they even get a chance to start training. Also, EVs should be made visible to the player, plain as day, in the summary page of your pokémon.

I wouldn't say "rolling a 0" is the worst part, because tbh, there has to be a lowest value. If the numbers were 5 to 36 rolling a 5 would be the exact same thing as rolling a zero.

Toujours said:

I wouldn't say "rolling a 0" is the worst part, because tbh, there has to be a lowest value. If the numbers were 5 to 36 rolling a 5 would be the exact same thing as rolling a zero.

Click to expand...

The values should never reach that low at all. The whole battle system and how well your pokemon performs is dependent on these values. The fact that they can roll that low at all is just punishing the player and the pokemon for no other reason then to make a haphazard attempt at making pokemon unique. So making some pokemon inherently weaker then others that can NEVER BE CHANGED OR IMPROVED UPON is uniqueness?

Just terrible.

XSky RiderX said:

I sort of doubt there will be new natures. If there were, I could possibly see them adding a whole new set of them that alter the HP stat, since it's the only stat (other than accuracy/evasion, but those shouldn't count) that isn't affected by natures. Which would be interesting for Pokemon that need the extra HP if 252 EVs wasn't enough.

Click to expand...

Yeah I'd agree with Sky Rider, I'd like to see a nature that boosts HP, heck we can even call it creative just to add both your ideas xD

Maybe we could have Double Natures, lowers two stats and raises two. That would be interesting.

Wouldn't that also bring about abilities that lower HP as well? I guess it'll be nice for pokemon that have lots of Hp already but needs a nature to up another stat like say Defense or Speed.

If there were ever new natures, then it would be only 10 new natures regarding HP. Unfortunately, there may be less than 10 natures GF haven't pick, which pretty much sealed off this unlikely inclusion.

Hmm, having natures that lower or raise HP is actually a pretty reasonable idea...I'd love to see that.

I doubt GF would add them this late however.

.EJ said:

Hmm, having natures that lower or raise HP is actually a pretty reasonable idea...I'd love to see that.

I doubt GF would add them this late however.

Click to expand...

This. Even just new clone natures but with different labels such as how Hardy and Serious are the same thing could be cool. Honestly, though, I don't see GF adding anything like new types, natures, ect this late in the game's timeline.

It would make the game incompatible and potentially disallow Pokémon transfers from older generations, so I'm against it.

vaporeon7 said:

It would make the game incompatible and potentially disallow Pokémon transfers from older generations, so I'm against it.

Click to expand...

The game is already going to be incompatible due to the fact that it's a 3DS exclusive. How the pokemon from older generations get transferred over is an entirely different subject.

vaporeon7 said:

It would make the game incompatible and potentially disallow Pokémon transfers from older generations, so I'm against it.

Click to expand...

It's already incompatible considering it's on the 3DS and the only Backwards compatible pokemon game there's been was G/S/C. And when I say backwards compatible, I mean being able to trade your pokemon from an newer generation to an older one, such as from Gen 5 to 4.

If they added new natures including HP, it'd take 11 more to complete the set, and that's because the neutral natures like Hardy and Serious aren't actually clones of each other. ALL of the natures, including the neutral ones, raise a stat by 10% and lower a stat by 10% - it's just that the neutral ones raise and lower the same stat, so it works out to neutral.

So there'd be 11 additional natures - one each to raise HP and lower one of the other stats, one each to lower HP and raise one of the other stats, and one to lower and raise HP (neutral).

I don't think that older pokemon would be any problem (or at least more of a problem than they're going to be anyway on a different platform), since the existing natures would probably be the same and they'd still have their existing natures. Though it would make it so that older pokemon caught in the new games would potentially not be tradeable to older games, but I wouldn't be surprised if that'll be the case anyway, with or without new natures.

I would sort of doubt that they'll do it just because that's 11 new natures - almost half again as many as currently - and for only situational gain. And the gain would be a bit unbalancing in some cases - imagine a Blissey with an HP enhancing nature, for instance.

All that said, I wouldn't mind seeing more natures, just for the variety. And as I mentioned somewhere else, I'd like to see the effect of natures reduced a bit, so that it would be more feasible to use pokemon with natures that aren't necessarily statistically beneficial, but just seem aesthetically appropriate. Take some of the pressure off and make the game more fun.

vaporeon7 said:

It would make the game incompatible and potentially disallow Pokémon transfers from older generations, so I'm against it.

Click to expand...

Why would that prevent transfers from Gen V, if I may ask?

I agree with adding an HP+ and HP- natures. I mean, it's a stat too, and it gets IV and EV input, so why not a nature to help or lower it? Though I don't imagine a lot of people would be using HP- natures, lol. But still! You need to have HP- natures to balance it out (all other states have + and - natures sooo).

EVs and IVs in Gen 6

So, I was thinking of what would happen if they siddenly got rid of EVs and IVs in Gen 6. What would happen to competitive battling? How would you react? If not, whould they add an easier way to EV/IV train/breed? I, personally, would be so happy to hear this, because EVs and IVs are confusing to me, and non-EVed or IVed pokemon stand no chance at beating a competitive pokemon. Of course, that's just my opinion. But honestly, how would you react?

Terrible idea. What would be the purpose? How do you think they're confusing?

2 IV = 1 Stat Point
4 EV = 1 Stat Point

The thing that's great about EVs and IVs as it is right now is the fact that they're easy to understand, hard to master, but not forced upon the player. I think we can expect the current system to stay similar, but maybe with more items and breeding options to make it more convenient for the player.